Re: Mnemomic names for revisions

On May 3, 2005, at 7:56 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 01:13:01AM +0200, David Gómez wrote:
>
>> Hi Tim ;),
>>
>> On May 03 at 02:24:49, Tim Hill wrote:
>>
>>> I confess not to understand the "anti-label" arguments...
>>>
>>
>> I don't understand them either.
>
> Excuse me for chiming in here, but I'd like to say I agree with this,
> too.

Me too :)

The thing that I find "weird" about using cheap copies is that it
changes the layout/structure of the filesystem tree (subversion's
filesystem, not working copies) which is not something I want to do.
A revision label, does the job of a marking a specific version
without changing the tree. It's not really a BIG deal, but I would
rather avoid having to treat some parts of the tree as serving that
sort of special purpose and not as part of the organizational
structure of my data.

As mentioned before, revision labels can serve a similar purpose as
PREV, COMMITTED, BASE, HEAD...

I can live without out labels, but if I had them, I would use them.

Scott

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 4 03:06:49 2005